| |||||||||||||
Good fences make good projects?Good fences make good projects?Posted Nov 11, 2011 11:22 UTC (Fri) by jnareb (subscriber, #46500)In reply to: Good fences make good projects? by ebirdie Parent article: Good fences make good projects?
> The article raised a question, why perf is deemed to indefinite life in the kernel tree? As I have considered perf to be a kernel performance tool for kernel developers and haven't yet seen the userspace tools I use to monitor and tune system performance to use perf for anything, I haven't payed much attention to it. Does perf's life in kernel tree and the perception hinder its worthyness and development of use in userspace? Thus a kernel test & ABI suite/tree like linux-next but to reverse direction seems logical from a sysadmin perspective.
"perf" development in Linux kernel tree makes it hard to package it and use it outside of kernel profiling. I was trying to use it to profile application (with limited success), in addition to other profiling tools that use perf events via PAPI library, and it was a bit difficult to make it work.
(Log in to post comments)
Good fences make good projects? Posted Nov 11, 2011 21:47 UTC (Fri) by bcopeland (subscriber, #51750) [Link]
> "perf" development in Linux kernel tree makes it hard to package it and use it outside of kernel profiling.
It seems the way it is handled in ubuntu at least is to package up perf as a script that just tells you to get yet another kernel-specific package that contains the actual binary. Given that, I find it amusing that perf is held as the gold standard for this kind of thing.
|
|||||||||||||